IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 08 April 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090015272 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that he be given promotion reconsideration for the rank of captain. 2. The applicant states that at the end of the summer of 2008 he received an email from the Department of the Army telling him to check his official military personnel file (OMPF) to prepare for the upcoming captain board. 3. He checked with his unit's personnel officer and was told to check his OMPF on the integrated Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) and make sure it was up to date because that information would be used by the promotion board. 4. He later learned that he should have checked his Human Resources Command, St. Louis (HRC-STL) file which he knew nothing about. As a result he was passed over for promotion due to a lack of education even though he had a bachelor's degree. 5. The applicant provides a letter from the Chief, Special Actions Branch, HRC-STL, dated 18 June 2009, and his college transcript which shows he was conferred a bachelor of science degree on 7 March 2003. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 8 October 2002 with prior inactive service. 2. He was commissioned as a second lieutenant on 23 August 2003 and he was promoted to 1st lieutenant effective 23 August 2005. 3. On 18 June 2009, HRC-STL responded to the applicant's request for a Special Selection Board (SSB). HRC-STL told the applicant that when his file was considered by the November 2008 Army Reserve Components Selection Board, it did not include verification of his civilian education. HRC-STL continued that he (the applicant) had from 8 September to 31 October 2008 to review his file. HRC-STL said that it is ultimately the final responsibility of the officer to make certain his promotion board file is complete. If he had exercised reasonable diligence and reviewed his promotion file, the error could have been discovered and corrected prior to the board. HRC-STL denied the applicant's request due to the fact that he did not review his promotion file. 4. The applicant is currently serving as an ARNG officer in the rank of first lieutenant. 5. Army Regulation 135–155 (ARNG and U.S. Army Reserve Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), paragraph 2–9, Civilian education requirements, states that effective 1 October 1995, no person may be selected for promotion to the Reserve grade of captain unless that person has been awarded a baccalaureate degree from an accredited institution recognized by the Secretary of Education, not later than the day before the selection board convene date. 6. Army Regulation 135–155, paragraph 3–19, General, states that promotion advisory boards/special selection boards are convened to correct/prevent an injustice to an officer or former officer who was eligible for promotion but whose records * through error, were not submitted to a mandatory promotion selection board for consideration. * contained a material error when reviewed by the mandatory selection board DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The absence of the applicant's college degree was certainly a material error which resulted in his nonselection for promotion to captain. 2. However, the applicant himself states that he was notified of his pending promotion consideration and was instructed to verify that the information and documentation on his iPERMS was correct and up to date. It is apparent that the applicant did not review his OMPF on iPERMS or he would have seen that his college degree was not posted to his records. 3. As such, the material error in the applicant's file was an omission which would have been discovered if the applicant had exercised reasonable diligence and reviewed his promotion file. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis to grant the applicant's request. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X__ ____X___ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ _X______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090015272 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090015272 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1